When commuters think NJ Transit these days, they think delays, overcrowded and broken down trains, trains smashing into Hoboken terminal...etc. I doubt at this point, public perception could be any lower. With funding reductions, service reductions, mismanagement, decaying infrastructure, and ridership increasing; New Jersey commuter train experiences are becoming more third world by the day. Perhaps, it is time NJ Transit thinks about a full rebrand to (re)ignite consumer confidence. The money it would cost to change a name and marginally improve customer experiences would pale in comparison to any infrastructure project, and could bring positivity and energy (think Virgin or Norwegian Air) to the increasingly downtrodden commuters who keep this economy going.

The name NJ Transit holds a spot near and dear to very little of the population, and the pragmatic name itself has no historical value.

What is really needed is an internal housecleaning,along with a rededication to running safely and close to on time.The internal housecleaning should include the political appointees,bring in some proven personel that understand commuterrail operations.It would help if the Trenton Capitol critters fund NJT properly,believe Gov Christe is a "Lame Duck" now.

Backshophoss wrote:What is really needed is an internal housecleaning,along with a rededication to running safely and close to on time.The internal housecleaning should include the political appointees,bring in some proven personel that understand commuterrail operations.It would help if the Trenton Capitol critters fund NJT properly,believe Gov Christe is a "Lame Duck" now.

NO rebrand,JUST Clean up their act!

I think it is more than that. You can bring all of the management that you want but the reality is, they are running MORE trains for MORE people without adding much capacity on an infrastructure that in some cases, dates back to the 1800's. Why is everyone surprised? Yet, every time I look around, there is some housing development being built, advertising they are close to public transportation.

It will take more than taxes or fees to fix this mess. It will take a complete renewal of assets in addition to brand new assets with a commitment to long term goals and planning. This has to include a diversification of resources and assets.

Hawaiitiki wrote:When commuters think NJ Transit these days, they think delays, overcrowded and broken down trains, trains smashing into Hoboken terminal...etc. I doubt at this point, public perception could be any lower. With funding reductions, service reductions, mismanagement, decaying infrastructure, and ridership increasing; New Jersey commuter train experiences are becoming more third world by the day. Perhaps, it is time NJ Transit thinks about a full rebrand to (re)ignite consumer confidence. The money it would cost to change a name and marginally improve customer experiences would pale in comparison to any infrastructure project, and could bring positivity and energy (think Virgin or Norwegian Air) to the increasingly downtrodden commuters who keep this economy going.

In my mind, this is such a typical US idea. Instead of actually making investments addressing the issues, let's rebrand, spend money on marketing and everything will be great again. Actually I think NJT is relatively well run considering decreasing investments and ever increasing amount of people it carries. With the exception of the Hoboken crash of course. I am taking the BC line every day and I do see a slight decrease in reliability during the Fat Moron's years. But overall, my commute is still fairly dependable. Most of the problems happen at the Penn station side and are not really NJT's fault. But of course the riding public is too stupid to realize this fact. Of course has the Fat Moron not canceled the ARC, NJT would've had a brand new station in NYC interdependent of Amtrak perhaps as soon as next year. I know many people here disagree...

I always thought it would be cool if Metro North rebranded itself "New York Central much in the way Connecticut trains use the New Haven trade dress and signage. New York Central would make perfect sense on the Harlem and Hudson lines, and while not entirely historically correct, it would make sense on the Port Jervis line, at least from a marketing point of view.

I've wondered in there was a traditional name NJ Transit could adopt. Probably only Jersey Central would make sense. As much as I'd like to see "Erie" and "Lackawanna" return, they refer to places far removed from the NJ Transit portions of the original system, and from a modern marketing viewpoint wouldn't make sense to current riders.

But it's hard to rebrand while a company in is the midst of an upheaval. BP adopted a new earth-friendly logo just after its big oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and that didn't fool anybody. Once NJT has weathered its current crisis, that's a good time to rebrand, saying you're looking toward the future. I you do it while you're still in chaos, he new brand gets tarnished as well.

Hawaiitiki wrote:When commuters think NJ Transit these days, they think delays, overcrowded and broken down trains, trains smashing into Hoboken terminal...etc. I doubt at this point, public perception could be any lower. With funding reductions, service reductions, mismanagement, decaying infrastructure, and ridership increasing; New Jersey commuter train experiences are becoming more third world by the day. Perhaps, it is time NJ Transit thinks about a full rebrand to (re)ignite consumer confidence. The money it would cost to change a name and marginally improve customer experiences would pale in comparison to any infrastructure project, and could bring positivity and energy (think Virgin or Norwegian Air) to the increasingly downtrodden commuters who keep this economy going.

In my mind, this is such a typical US idea. Instead of actually making investments addressing the issues, let's rebrand, spend money on marketing and everything will be great again. Actually I think NJT is relatively well run considering decreasing investments and ever increasing amount of people it carries. With the exception of the Hoboken crash of course. I am taking the BC line every day and I do see a slight decrease in reliability during the *** *****'s years. But overall, my commute is still fairly dependable. Most of the problems happen at the Penn station side and are not really NJT's fault. But of course the riding public is too stupid to realize this fact. Of course has the *** ***** not canceled the ARC, NJT would've had a brand new station in NYC interdependent of Amtrak perhaps as soon as next year. I know many people here disagree...

Rebranding a US idea? Seems to be more common in Europe. Right now, the TGV is suddenly becoming "InOui" on a whim of the SNCF directors.

And enough with ARC being a panacea, with all due respect. The last permutation of that was designed to be a disaster. No access to Sunnyside Yard, no interoperability between tunnels and station levels, and absolutely no relief for NYP congestion but instead intended for transferring Hoboken trains into a new undersized terminal (hence the "double the number of trains" rhetoric); completely against the original ARC spirit.

Idiot Railfan wrote:I always thought it would be cool if Metro North rebranded itself "New York Central" much in the way Connecticut trains use the New Haven trade dress and signage …

Don't remember the MTA Central and MTA New Haven branding? That is what the commuter services were branded as during Penn Central contract operation, and before Conrail being ordered to cease passenger operations thus precipitating the creation of Metro-North. Besides, the stations in Connecticut (including Shore Line East) have had a Connecticut Commuter Rail logo instead of "Metro-North" for a number of decades now.